Educational systems: Square is the new round
In the past within Netherlands there were wells in every village, where people came for clean drinking water. Besides the function of a water collection point, you could also visit the location for the latest gossip. The water point was a social center for a village. When the wells disappeared because houses were connected directly to the water supply, the social function disappeared. But did people stop meeting and stop gossiping? Of course not, it shifted to other locations.
Urgency
In the same way as the wells, the infrastructure of our digital network currently now also connects knowledge to “every household” through an internet connection. In the past, we all had to go to a library or school (or that one specific professor). It was the only way to gain the newest, most current knowledge. Now information flows freely. Knowledge and expertise flow into the living room via computer, tablet or even straight in to your pocket via telephone. This change has been going on for “only” twenty years. In recent years, the change has really begun to take hold in education.
In the analogy of the well, social interaction has been absorbed into other, obvious, non-directed environments. Think of the cafe or a (sports) club, but certainly also the social dimension of the Internet. In higher education, we naturally want to remain the hot-spot for anyone who wants to develop at that level. This requires an organization that is equipped to properly support flexible learning paths and good appropriate didactic models, active knowledge sharing and intensive cooperation with partners in the work field. Given the current social developments, accelerating digitization and changes in professional roles, I personally feel a high urgency to get started.
Vision of a learning environment
In a meeting on “hybrid learning environments”, a question came up about leadership and how it differs from the classroom method. The Fontys University Framework for Hybrid Learning Environments, talks about the mission and vision of a hybrid learning environment. In this case we talk about hybrid when there is a traingle between students, lecturers and the work environment. In this situation real work experience and have save learning environment are combined.
Why you would start such a learning community is one of the most important topics to think about. Yet that doesn’t get you there. For I believe that a beautifully formulated mission or vision (focus) cannot be achieved without an adequate organizational structure (set up). Then the right actions can be taken in the operations (perform).
According to Kotter (2012), one of the biggest challenges for leaders is to maintain a competitive edge in the ongoing turbulence and disruption. In doing so, he indicates that there are plenty of examples from the past that, when there is a threat or, on the contrary, a new opportunity is up for grabs, they fail to implement the change. Known and tested strategies are used to set up the new system. The rules of the past become an obstacle once you want to operate outside the old structure.
Hybrid learning environments are a possible answer in staying relevant and still have an important part in the flow of knowledge. The new social function in the analogy of the well, a new knowledge hot-spot. In the environments in which I am (and have been) active, I see that learning on the basis of equality is a primary attitude. I see the work field, teachers, students, citizens and/or clients who continue to develop themselves together and really work together, better said co-create, in a learning community. A community that likes to share knowledge and where there is room for experimentation. Where mistakes are just part of the job, because they have value for learning and motivation. The closed learning environment of the classroom becomes an open learning community, a community of collaboration.
Transition: learning in proximity to work
External organizations used to be a part of the program only during internships and graduation. These have now become a continuously involved partner to test knowledge in practice (valorization). To think together with students about solutions about open and often complex issues. Issues that require creativity and stimulate problem-solving skills.
We are familiar with the knowledgeable teacher, who stands for his content and profession, who is often difficult to access for the learner. This will change to a learning coach with a specific expertise. The coach as a guide in the field of possibilities, which is still unknown to the student. The coach can explain the exponentially growing content and theories and their applications. Most important, the coach stands with the student in the quest to become a professional.
The lecturer and the professional field will learn continuously, because learning comes quite natural when you take on complex challenges together in an authentic environment. Knowledge and skills remain necessary, but become available and accessible to all parties. This new teacher is supported by an infrastructure of interconnected systems in which networking, sharing knowledge, collaborating with external partners and supervising students are all possible.
The previously dependent students, who were guided by well structured an educational program, are now given the role of responsible, self-directed, junior professionals. Who can develop on the basis of current issues from and in real practices. They can choose, within the systems in place, a project, issue or challenge that best suits the learning interests, goals, or even passion. There is a sense of urgency for learning. They can easily connect with the right expertise around these projects through a social layer. They have systems that support 360-degree feedback and can show their learning growth through an e-portfolio.
The above makes it clear that since the turn of the century there have been major shifts in the way people communicate. Digital technology has drasticly impacted the how connections are made and how interactions with the world around us flow.
The way how education is structured has very changed little, however the complexity of our environment is increasing exponentially. In addition, we are getting a different relationship to the more fluid becoming knowledge. Education is diverging, because there are more and more (hyper) specializations, because the professional practice -and life- demands it.
Towards a new organizational structure
New learning environments are being set up, yet these often continue to operate within their own silos. They hold on to old structures, which once served the process very well, but now begin to interfere with the new practices. Those new (square) practices must conform to the existing (round) system. To understand the impact of new learning environments on organizational structure, it makes sense to look at the operation first.
I want to avoid the discussion that one system is better than another, however, an overview of the differences can be given by looking at the modus operandi. The purpose of this is to show that the two systems are different, need a different (ICT) infrastructure and therefore also a different form of leadership. With a remaining question: “Can square be organized from a round organization?”
Of course, we a lot of educators are already in transition between these two systems. There are less formal and more evolving, specialized relationships between colleagues in many professional situations. Relationships, in part due to digital opportunities, are easier to sustain than in the past and you can find each other better. As a result, the benefits of hierarchical boss-subordinate relationships are less apparent (Wellman et al., 2014). Among other things, this means that our work has become increasingly spatially distributed, as communication tools connect people and a significant proportion could do work from home.
Locations are becoming much more of a function that is available to everyone in the organization, where certain generic or specialist tasks can be performed. There will be more room for informal learning through spontaneous meeting, to find the balance between relaxation and (hyper)focus, individually or in teams or groups. The space will also accommodate encounters with the professional field. It’s all about developing together: getting inspired, finding projects and doing research that help you take the next step in your personal development.
Stop trying to fit in
I increasingly notice that ‘the round system’ and ‘the square system’ depart from a different intention. One was the well, a source from which to gain knowledge and skills. The other supports social cohesion in the community. In the latter, stimulating personal and social development, knowledge sharing and creation are central.
Now, we can adjust the systems to each other or make them fit, but I think the processes are too far apart for that to work. Like operating programs on a computer. If you want to run new processes and programs on Windows 95 it is simply impossible, too much has changed in the technology. The infrastructure and the way control is implemented no longer functions. The result is a message: “system incompatible”, with a chance that the system crashes if you dare to continue.
I think, as Laloux points out in “reinventing organizations” (2015), we are at a breaking point. The question does remain who is going to lead us into, or through, this transition? As the accompanying picture this article shows, the question is whether it is desirable to adapt “square thinking” so that it fits into a “round system”.
This article is a co-creation, although I am the final writer, many shared their thought and some have written along. Thanks to those people from the “hybrid learning environments program”, iFontys, Fontys Innoversity, concerned colleagues and partners from the workfield. Together we are open to the dialogue around this topic! Feel free to join!
Literature
Kotter, J. P. (2015, May 19). Accelerate! Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2012/11/accelerate
Laloux, F. (2015). Reinventing organizations. Lannoo Meulenhoff-Belgium.
Wellman, B., Dimitrova, D., Hayat, Z., Mo, G. Y., & Smale, L. (2014). Networking Scholars in a Networked Organization. Contemporary Perspectives on Organizational Social Networks, 479–497.